Question 1: Study Purpose/Question
(a) Did the study have a clearly stated
your response below:
research question of the paper pertains to study parent’s viewpoint of
providing vaccination to their children in Singapore (Kurup, He, Wang, Wang and
Shorey, 2017). Its essential aim was to analyze whether the parents view of
providing vaccination to their children as a common way of providing healthcare
or it is a social responsibility towards the community they are living (Kurup et al., 2017). Giving vaccination is
one of the crucial and globally accepted elements of children’s healthcare and
the management of the same becomes significant (Kurup et al., 2017). In previous papers it
was observed that parent’s have trust issues and concerns when it comes to
providing their children with vaccinations. This is the first such study that
is being conducted in Singapore. Overall, the study put forth’s its efforts to
study the concerns and perception of the parent’s with regard to their
children’s vaccination need (Kurup
et al., 2017).
Question 2: Relevance to nursing/midwifery practice
how this question was relevant to nursing/midwifery practice?
study puts emphasis on the need to bring attention of doctors and other medical
practitioners as well as politicians on giving due consideration to the issues
raised by the parents about vaccination (Kurup et al., 2017). It becomes crucial for
removing any hindrance in implementation of children’s healthcare programs by
building an effective communication system with the parents. It is clear that
the study is important as it has never been conducted I Singapore. The study
can be used in nursing practice to better educate parents who are concerned
about their child’s well being (Lindlof and Taylor, 2017). It can also help save
time as parents can take a swift decision and will not wait for vaccination and
also help them get better access the next time.
The paper will also guide the nurses to provide information to the
parents regarding vaccination with evidentiary support and better their
experience and that of the children (Kurup
et al., 2017). The paper collects and displays the details on the lack of
information providing to the parents about their children’s healthcare and how
healthcare institution lack in building trust and communicate about vaccination
practice (Bryman, 2017). It emphasizes on the need for nurses and midwives to
communicate effectively and provide the parents with important information and
also tell about the side effects and how to manage the same. Timely
intervention links with the decrease of the parent’s anxiety and to integrate
with their work schedules (Lindlof and Taylor, 2017). Thus, this becomes essential for countries
like Hong Kong, China and Singapore that have made vaccination mandatory to provide
the next generation with basic healthcare (Kurup et al., 2017).
Question 3: Ethics
were the possible risks of participating in the study?
the risks associated with the study revolves around the participant’s decision
to give their information and medical data or not. It was also important to
keep all the information given by the participants confidential (Lindlof and
these risks clearly identified by the authors?
If risks were identified by the authors, how did they
propose to minimise risk?
researchers associated with the study understood the need of keeping
information of the participant confidential and thus, took written as well as
verbal consent of the participants after recruiting them (Kurup et al., 2017). The consent was
necessary to ascertain that the participants voluntarily gave the data and the
same was kept confidential. In addition, the participants could withdraw their
consent anytime for whatever reason (Kurup
et al., 2017).
(d) Did the
authors state that they had approval from an ethics committee to undertake the
(e) How did
the authors obtain informed consent from participants?
consent which was taken in written form by communicating to them directly and
focusing that they voluntarily participated and also to maintain that the data
should be kept confidential. This was assured to the participants through
written and verbal communication (Kurup
et al., 2017).
Did you identify and potential risks associated with
the study that were not identified by the authors and if so, what were they?
the risks identified by me is the legal risk which has not been identified by
the authors of the study (Bryman, 2017). The possibility of the subject of the
research be in violation of certain legal principles has not been accessed
which can incur criminal or civil liability, the same should have been
considered by the authors (Berger, R., 2015).
Question 4: Study Methodology
the chosen methodology for this study?
pertains in constructing a qualitative design through not fully structured face
to-face or telephonic meetings (Kurup
et al., 2017).
this choice suitable for the given research problem/question?
Explain your response to (b):
with the authors’ choice of methodology chosen for the paper as the aim is to
conduct a qualitative evocative research is to compile the experience of a
certain number of people (Kurup
et al., 2017). Similarly this study is uncovering the view of parents
with regard to their children vaccination need.
It will enhance future medical services and increase the reliability on
health care industry when it comes to children vaccination need (Kurup et al., 2017). The aim is thus to
compile a list of data which provides health care practitioners with insights.
The semi-structured information is optimal for dividing the information into
two parts first, to analyze the fundamental perceptions of the participants and
the second, to check other possibilities and to get answers on that basis
Question 5: Data Collection/Rigour
how the data was collected for this study (interview, observation, etc).
initial interview conducted for examining the methodology which was not
included in the final information analysis (Kurup et al., 2017). Firstly, a total of 44
parents were contacted and out of those 16 parents declined to participate and
six of the 44 did not meet the criteria of selection. 22 parents gave consent,
1 was taken for the initial interview and 2 withdrew their consent due to busy
schedule. The interviews were conducted and data was duly taken (Kurup et al., 2017). After the 16th
interview the data was found saturated.
Three more interviews were conducted to check the data and confirm it.
Therefore, a total of 19 interviews were conducted and the input was taken, the
interviews lasted from 10 to 30 minutes (Kurup et al., 2017).
(b) Did the
researchers provide the participants with the opportunity to check the
collected data or research findings?
Did the researchers continue recruiting people to the
study until data saturation was reached?
(d) Did the
study use multiple data collection methods (eg collect data from more than one
how the points in (b), (c) and (d) contribute to the trustworthiness of the
overall research findings.
participants were shown the data collected to check and verify them so that no
significant data is missed or lost and therefore, increasing the reliability of
the research works (Lindlof and Taylor, 2017).
research undertook the following methods which showcases the reliability of the
checking the transcripts (Kurup
et al., 2017)
conducted by contemporary member
words described by the participants are used
triangulation (Lindlof and Taylor, 2017)
to check on the recordings of the interview, notes and other recorded documents
on the research theme and sub-theme were consequent.
of the verbatim quotes for sustaining the findings
the socio-demographic findings (Kurup
et al., 2017)
Further, the aspect of data
saturation as a criteria to derive evidentiary on the quality of the Pre-mentioned
qualitative research thus, increasing its reliability (Kurup et al., 2017).
Question 6: Participants
many participants were included in the study?
A total number 44 participants
were contacted but final 19 participants were selected whose data was collected
(Kurup et al., 2017). The
participants were within the age range of 26 to 47 years and were married. Out
of the 19, 10 were fathers and their ethnicity ranged from Malay (4), Chinese
(11), 1 was Jewish and 4 were Indians all were living in Singapore (Kurup et al., 2017). Out of the 19 only 12
were parents to a single child and 15 participants had little information about
vaccination before 1 and 18 months and 4 participants had no information about
vaccination (Kurup et al., 2017). The
participants disclosed that their child has received between 1 to 9
vaccinations since their birth. Those 4 parents could not remember the number.
Also, monthly income was recorded to be between $2,000 and $10,000 and a total
of 14 participants reported an income of $3,000 (Kurup et al., 2017).
were the inclusion and exclusion criteria?
The standards for including
parent who was the primary provided for the child
who had a healthy child of the age bracket between 0 and 18 and was been given
who understood and write English (Kurup
et al., 2017).
The standards for
excluding the participants were:
who had cognitive problems were excluded
with physical disability (Kurup
et al., 2017).
Explain how the participants were recruited.
The clinics in Singapore where
young children came for vaccination were contacted and the participants were
recruited from there itself (Kurup
et al., 2017). The races in Singaporean society are divided into 4 kinds
and they are; Chinese who constitute of about 74.3% of the total, 13.4% are
Malaysian, Indian are 9.1% and the rest 3.2% are of other races as of June 2016
(Kurup et al., 2017).
the setting in which the study took place (hospital, community, etc)?
The participants were selected
from the clinics in Singapore where they went to get their child vaccinated and
the study of the interview were conducted through telephones or through face to
face discussion at a place and time convenient with the participants (Kurup et al., 2017).
Question 7: Research Findings (outcomes)
(a) What were the main findings of this study?
(provide a dot point summary).
promoting vaccination uptake
nature (Kurup et al., 2017)
of children and the community
ü Fear of
consequence of not giving the vaccination (Kurup et al., 2017)
that delay taking of vaccination
experience about the safety and risk
convenience to take other alternative vaccinations (Kurup et al., 2017)
which showcase those parents being supportive and when the vaccination occurs.
physical pain and other negative results.
that the child is ready to take the vaccination
the child and monitoring the progression (Kurup et al., 2017)
requirement of parents to demand in
service, communication and information about the vaccination with the
of the selection using the reminder and restricting waiting time
ü Creating and developing communication between
the parents and healthcare professionals (Kurup et al., 2017)